WTN: 1997 Monsanto Chianti Classico Riserva

[Brad Ballinger]

1997 Monsanto Chianti Classico Riserva. When I first had this wine 3-4 years ago, it was on the austere side, showing a hollowness in the midpalate. Well, it hasn't really "filled out," but it has "evened out," if that makes any sense. On this occasion, this wine gave off the strongest graphite nose I've ever experienced. I could detect it without even having to shove my schnozz into the glass. The mineral profile of this wine was truly stunning. Lurking behind it was some faint bright red fruit and a slightly spicy character. In the mouth, the acids were quite pronounced keeping the wine lively and elevated on the palate. From a flavor standpoint, minerals were still in the driver's seat relegating the fruit and spice (there are cloves here) to a supporting role. For such a hyped up superripe vintage, this wine doesn't fall culprit to an overly juicy style by any stretch. There are some tannins that could stand to loosen their grip just a bit, and I think this wine will show better yet in a handful more years.

[docsconz]

I've always enjoyed the wines of Monsanto, especially the "Il Poggio". I've had the '97 of that and it was delicious. I've been enjoying vintages from the late 70's and have found that they tend to be at their best at around 10-15 years of age. The winery itself is absolutely spectacular and well worth a visit if in the area.

[CityCook]

I had the pleasure of being introduced to Monsanto's Chianti Classico (I didn't write the vintage down in my notes, dammit; probably a 1999 or 2000) just today, in my wine class at culinary school. The instructor (Steve Eliot; heard of him?) had us try it against one of the nicest fiasco-wrapped Chiantis available, i.e.: some of the nastiest, thinnest, most acrid volumes of swill I've ever had in my mouth. I found the Classico well-rounded, with cherry/berry fruit balanced under layers of rich earth. It was a good example, to me, both of what chianti can be and of what traditional Italian winemaking means, as compared to a super-tuscan we also tried.

["T"]

I've had many 1997 Tuscan's and so far the verdict is lukewarm. For such a hyped vintage the wines have not lived up to all the print they have been given.

Not to say that they have been bad, they certainly have not, but I wonder if either the Monsanto in question is playing dumb, it is the riserva BTW, or are we the victims of hype?

Now the 2001 Rosso di Montalcino from Siro Paccenti, there's a seal clubber for ya.

I think I posted notes on that a while ago.

[Brad Ballinger]

I wonder if either the Monsanto in question is playing dumb, it is the riserva BTW, or are we the victims of hype?

I greatly liked the Monsanto. I think it was playing "dumber" earlier in its life, and is only starting to come out. In a few years it will be a wine I will greatly enjoy.

Regarding hype, there will always be hype and always be victims. 1997 in Tuscany is a pretty good example of both. Usually the victims complain of overripeness, overextraction, etc. (arguably noted more in the Super Tuscans than the CCRs, but it shows up everywhere). I liked that this Monsanto CCR didn't leave me a victim of the hype.

[Coop]

I have been impressed by the 2001 vintage in Tuscany, especially for early drinking. The 1999 Chianti's seem very tight at this point as well as the other Sangiovese wines (Morellino DOC etc). I have found the 2001's to be alot like my favorite Chianti vintage, 1990. I have a bottle of this wine from 1999, I plan on holding it for another year or two.